What's new

The Little Thread Which Grew - the Apollo '73 to Everything But

Status
Not open for further replies.

John H

New Member
Re: The old days - Aboard the Apollo - 1973

Wow... this is quite some thread! I just wanted to mention or echo some thoughts I read here about being aboard the Apollo in 1971 as an outer-org student on the OEC/FEBC. During the OEC, we would have drills where we would go to posts on the ship and debug them so their stats went up. And, some of the posts held by these guys who were overwhelmed, overworked, unhatted, underfed, untrained... yet had been doing the post for months or years was very sad to see. In fact, I was shocked, that this was THE model org on the planet, and was in the worse condition I had ever seen. I would go in and help the person get his hat together, help organize his mest and flow lines, clean up his backlogs, and just help to generally bring him uptone. This appeared to be the situation throughout the ship, with the exception of LRH's personal mimeo line; which was spotless... every word or letter paid close attention to, getting out products that were accurate, beautiful, and valuable; and low and behold, the I/C of the area was the most uptone staffmember I had met. I hope generally that the OEC/FEBC students did bring some order to the ship and its crew and help to get them on source, hatted, relaxed and focused on a job that was no longer overwhelming them, so that they could get products out, stay out of ethics trouble and maybe even advance on the Bridge...Maybe.
 

lkwdblds

Crusader
Re: The old days - Aboard the Apollo - 1973

Wow... this is quite some thread! I just wanted to mention or echo some thoughts I read here about being aboard the Apollo in 1971 as an outer-org student on the OEC/FEBC. During the OEC, we would have drills where we would go to posts on the ship and debug them so their stats went up. And, some of the posts held by these guys who were overwhelmed, overworked, unhatted, underfed, untrained... yet had been doing the post for months or years was very sad to see. In fact, I was shocked, that this was THE model org on the planet, and was in the worse condition I had ever seen. I would go in and help the person get his hat together, help organize his mest and flow lines, clean up his backlogs, and just help to generally bring him uptone. This appeared to be the situation throughout the ship, with the exception of LRH's personal mimeo line; which was spotless... every word or letter paid close attention to, getting out products that were accurate, beautiful, and valuable; and low and behold, the I/C of the area was the most uptone staffmember I had met. I hope generally that the OEC/FEBC students did bring some order to the ship and its crew and help to get them on source, hatted, relaxed and focused on a job that was no longer overwhelming them, so that they could get products out, stay out of ethics trouble and maybe even advance on the Bridge...Maybe.

Nice to have you reading and posting here John. It is interesting how you public OEC and FEBC students helped to raise the tone level and clean up the lines on the Apollo in 1971.

What you describe above as well as what I and others found when we arrived on the Apollo are really major tip offs that Scientology could not deliver what it was promising. To be brutally honest, it illustrated that Red on White Spiritual Tech and especially Green and White Management Tech weren't what they was promoted to be.

APPLYING THE POLICY LOOK, DON'T LISTEN
Look at what we had there on the Apollo:

LRH in command - He was the founder of the movement which was going to first "clear this planet" and then branch out to clear parts of this Galaxy and eventually "clear the entire universe". LRH was sold to us as being the wisest and most powerful being in the universe.

The Most Senior Staff on Earth serving as Commodore's Staffs for each Division and other top International posts, Including Mary Sue Hubbard (Head of the Guardian's Office) and Diana Hubbard.

Some of the most senior and most able people on the planet, all Sea Org members serving on Staff

All of Hubbard's Policies were present and the Apollo delivered the entire bridge.

When I arrived, I "assumed" that since Hubbard was on board, everything would be totally standard. How could it be otherwise? Here was the man who was spearheading the movement to bring sanity and order to the entire planet. Surely bringing sanity and order to two or three hundred of some of the most brilliant people on Earth on board a vessel only about 100 meters long would be no problem for such a great man and his elite crew.

As the French say, "Au Contraire mon Frere!" or To the contrary my Brother! This ship was one of the most poorly run operations that I have ever encountered. It is true that there were a lot of kind, able and caring people on board but they were cowed and usually in fear of their jobs.

The place was run very poorly. Hubbard himself was not actually running the Flagship Org but his hand picked executives were and this ship was in a state of Confusion!

The the ship looked good from a distance but the crew areas were filthy, unkempt, unsanitary and smelly. One of the reasons was the absence of laundry facilities. With only one day off every two weeks, and only if one's staff were up, it was impossible to do one's laundry. Worse yet, if one washed something there was no place to let it dry. Staff would wash their underwear in salt water with no soap and hang it wet on their locker doors in the berthing area. This created a foul stench which came upstairs into the rear fantail area and pervaded that area which is where a lot of us ate our meals.

Hubbard did not even write any policy to cover what should be done so that the crew always had clean, dry and non smelly undergarments and clothes. HE JUST DID NOT CARE ENOUGH TO ACT. Something could have been arranged for the ship to have the crews' laundry done once a week in port but he ignored the problem and let us all sleep and eat in filthy, smelly and unsanitary quarters.

Neither of the two posts which I occupied even had a Hat Write Up. People were routinely assigned posts which they had no training for.

Now I ask you, wouldn't you expect a great man, with a great crew and superior "tech" who was promoting that he was going to clear the entire planet, to be able to run a single medium sized ship such that everything was runing perfectly?

RED FLAGS - If one applied Hubbard's own policy "to look and not listen to PR boasts" one could see immediately that something was not right. Talk about red flags! The dismal condition of that ship and many of its crew members is a simply enormous red flag. There is enough here in this one huge outpoint that an astute person would start asking some questions as to why things were this way.
Lakey

PS - Next morning - My post had enormous typos and mis-spellings. i cleaned them up.... Sorry.
 
Last edited:

Leon

Gold Meritorious Patron
Re: The old days - Aboard the Apollo - 1973

Wow... this is quite some thread! I just wanted to mention or echo some thoughts I read here about being aboard the Apollo in 1971 as an outer-org student on the OEC/FEBC. During the OEC, we would have drills where we would go to posts on the ship and debug them so their stats went up. And, some of the posts held by these guys who were overwhelmed, overworked, unhatted, underfed, untrained... yet had been doing the post for months or years was very sad to see. In fact, I was shocked, that this was THE model org on the planet, and was in the worse condition I had ever seen. I would go in and help the person get his hat together, help organize his mest and flow lines, clean up his backlogs, and just help to generally bring him uptone. This appeared to be the situation throughout the ship, with the exception of LRH's personal mimeo line; which was spotless... every word or letter paid close attention to, getting out products that were accurate, beautiful, and valuable; and low and behold, the I/C of the area was the most uptone staffmember I had met. I hope generally that the OEC/FEBC students did bring some order to the ship and its crew and help to get them on source, hatted, relaxed and focused on a job that was no longer overwhelming them, so that they could get products out, stay out of ethics trouble and maybe even advance on the Bridge...Maybe.


Yep. I was on that course too in 1971 and I remember this drill. I worked with a girl in Treasury - I forget her name but I remember her tears when she told me of the overwhelm and lack of help from seniors etc. Flag was a disorganised mess at that time.
 

afaceinthecrowd

Gold Meritorious Patron
Re: The old days - Aboard the Apollo - 1973

Wow... this is quite some thread! I just wanted to mention or echo some thoughts I read here about being aboard the Apollo in 1971 as an outer-org student on the OEC/FEBC. During the OEC, we would have drills where we would go to posts on the ship and debug them so their stats went up. And, some of the posts held by these guys who were overwhelmed, overworked, unhatted, underfed, untrained... yet had been doing the post for months or years was very sad to see. In fact, I was shocked, that this was THE model org on the planet, and was in the worse condition I had ever seen. I would go in and help the person get his hat together, help organize his mest and flow lines, clean up his backlogs, and just help to generally bring him uptone. This appeared to be the situation throughout the ship, with the exception of LRH's personal mimeo line; which was spotless... every word or letter paid close attention to, getting out products that were accurate, beautiful, and valuable; and low and behold, the I/C of the area was the most uptone staffmember I had met. I hope generally that the OEC/FEBC students did bring some order to the ship and its crew and help to get them on source, hatted, relaxed and focused on a job that was no longer overwhelming them, so that they could get products out, stay out of ethics trouble and maybe even advance on the Bridge...Maybe.

Welcome John H! :thumbsup:

So glad you are here with all of Us.:yes:

I had a number of OEC/FEBC Students Interne under me at Flag over the years.

I was thankful for their help as I, like everyone else, was worn to a frazzle and hopeful that these Interns would perhaps have gotten “It” better than I and that they would be the future of a better Scn.

My time at Flag (10 years or so) was more than intense; it was the life and times of a young, well educated man with a “fire in his belly” hanging his entire past, present and future out with reckless abandon to help make a better world for all that he encountered on his path.

Every Interne under me helped me greatly in those times. I saw myself in their eyes and hoped that that they were “better”. “more able” and “aware’ than I.

The sad thing is that the OEC/FEBC Model is terribly, terribly flawed…as I have endeavored to explain why I think such in thousands of words posted on ESMB.

A wonderful observation and contribution by you re: El Ron’s personal mimeo lines. All of Hisself’s personal lines were treated and handled differently than everything else on the Ship...I know this from having been there and from having been on El Ron’s personal lines.

I do so hope you will post more on ESMB when you wish to and are ready.

Your first post is fascinating, most helpful and “real”, AFAIC.:coolwink:

Face :)
 
Last edited:

lkwdblds

Crusader
Re: The old days - Aboard the Apollo - 1973

Welcome John H! :thumbsup:

So glad you are here with all of Us.:yes:

I had a number of OEC/FEBC Students Interne under me at Flag over the years.

I was thankful for their help as I, like everyone else, was worn to a frazzle and hopeful that these Interns would perhaps have gotten “It” better than I and that they would be the future of a better Scn.

My time at Flag (10 years or so) was more than intense; it was the life and times of a young, well educated man with a “fire in his belly” hanging his entire past, present and future out with reckless abandon to help make a better world for all that he encountered on his path.

Every Interne under me helped my greatly in those times. I saw myself in their eyes and hoped that that they were “better”. “more able” and “aware’ than I.

The sad thing is that the OEC/FEBC Model is terribly, terribly flawed…as I have endeavored to explain why I think such in thousands of words posted on ESMB.

A wonderful observation and contribution by you re: El Ron’s personal mimeo lines. All of Hisself’s personal lines were treated and handled differently than everything else on the Ship...I know this from having been there and from having been on El Ron’s personal lines.

I do so hope you will post more on ESMB when you wish to and are ready.

Your first post is fascinating, most helpful and “real”, AFAIC.:coolwink:

Face :)

Thanks Face. I agree with you assessment of John. Also, all your writings on what you found in your 10 years at Flag have been invaluable in trying to understand what was really going on there. Besides that, your writings are extremely entertaining.

What you and John mention about LRH's mimeo lines and other things which belonged to LRH are quite pertinent.

I just saw a movie yesterday called "The Help". It is about Black / White relations in the South, Jackson, Mississippi, in the late 1950's and early 1960's when Jim Crow laws still existed, just before the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

SEPARATE BUT EQUAL? In the movie, the policy called "Separate but Equal" was mentioned. Of course, things were separate but THEY WERE NOT EQUAL. Still lip service was paid that they were.

With LRH, he practiced the same policy as was used in the South. Since he was in essence a dictator over his organization, he did not need to sugar coat or pay lip service to the fact that his belongings were "equal" to what his crew were partaking of. LRH's stuff, whether it was food, room accomodations, transportation, uniforms, laundry and hygiene, work areas, work equipment, etc. was always kept separate from the crews and his stuff was the epitomy of luxury while the crew's gear was usually of "skid row" issue.

At the time, I felt this was appropriate considering that LRH was responsible for developing all the "Tech" and for providing it to us to help us get out of the trap. As events have unfolded and more and more info about LRH has been revealed, I no longer think it was appropriate for him to live in kingly fashion while those who served him lived like paupers. IMO, certainly, the leader's gear should be better and more extensive than that of a crew member but not to the extent that it was on the Apollo.
Lakey
 
Last edited:
Is a double-dip recession the least of our fears?

Is a double-dip recession the least of our fears? Why the economy could be in for a decade of stagnation

By Zachary Roth | The Lookout – Tue, Aug 23, 2011

Amid bleak economic growth and unemployment, the stock market swoon, and the downgrade of the credit rating of the federal government, the fear of a dreaded double-dip recession--or even of a 21st-century Great Depression--has been taking hold.

But a rough consensus among economists may be starting to emerge. According to this line of thinking, although a double-dip is certainly possible, a long period of stagnation--that is, frustratingly low growth--is more likely, much like what we've seen since the recession officially ended two years ago. That would be preferable to another recession, of course. But it would mean that ordinary Americans--especially the roughly 26 million who either can't find a job or have given up looking--can look forward to years of hardship.

"I think extended stagnation, rather than a double-dip, is most likely," Mark Thoma, an economics professor at the University of Oregon, told The Lookout.
An Associated Press survey of economists released Tuesday put the likelihood of a recession--that is, another two or more straight quarters of economic contraction--before August 2012 at only 26 percent. But the respondents also expected the economy to inch along at just 2.1 percent growth for the rest of the year, and to barely do better in 2012.

The Federal Reserve appears to take a similar view. Announcing earlier this month that it would hold interest rates near zero for at least another two years, the central bank said it "now expects a somewhat slower pace of recovery over coming quarters" than it had previously--a prediction that's consistent with a lengthy period of weak growth.

And J.P. Morgan, Goldman Sachs, and Morgan Stanley all cut their growth forecasts last week, with J.P. Morgan predicting just 1 percent growth for the fourth quarter of the year--lower even than the 1.3 percent figure from the second quarter that helped spark double-dip speculation. Morgan Stanley cited in part the federal government's expected spending cuts, which would likely have a negative effect on growth.

Some economists think the focus on the double-dip is counter-productive, because it downplays the damage that a lengthy period of weak growth would do.
"The goal isn't to stay above zero," Jared Bernstein, who recently stepped down as an economic adviser to Vice President Joe Biden, wrote last week. "It's to grow fast enough to put people back to work."

Bernstein argues that instead of focusing narrowly on whether the economy is growing or shrinking, we should look at whether the economy is meeting its potential growth rate, which, based on productivity and the growth of the labor force, is 2.4 percent. By that standard, we've been in what Bernstein calls a "growth recession"--a period when the economy is technically expanding, but not by enough to exceed its potential--since the middle of last year.
According to some scholars, history suggests that's not likely to change any time soon. In a paper written last year for the Kansas City Fed, economists Carmen and Vincent Reinhart found that the impact on the economy and job growth of an economic "shock" like the bursting of the housing bubble and the subsequent financial crisis typically lingers for around a decade. "Income growth tends to slow and unemployment remains elevated for a very long time after a severe shock," they wrote, predicting "a lengthy period of retrenchment."

Even longer-term trends may be in play, too. In his recent e-book, The Great Stagnation, George Mason University economics professor Tyler Cowen argues that developed economies worldwide are in the midst of a slowdown, because the pace of innovation is slowing. For the developed world, large-scale, growth-generating improvements like electricity, penicillin and mass education are all largely completed. The next wave of similar advances--the Internet being the prime example--aren't employing as many people as those that came before.
According to Thoma, the rise in long-term joblessness--already at record levels--that would accompany prolonged stagnation would likely lead to a glut of people dropping out of the labor force entirely, after spending months or years searching fruitlessly for work. Many of these would likely be older workers who decide to simply hang on until Social Security kicks in.

Other workers, especially those in fast-moving industries like technology, would see their skills erode, making it even harder for them to find work, Thoma said. And even those who found work would likely see a reduction in their lifetime earnings, the evidence suggests.

As Thoma summed it up: "The longer the recovery drags on, the more permanent the damage."
 
Steve Jobs

Jobs at Apple: Master inventor, master marketer
By JORDAN ROBERTSON - AP Technology Writer | AP – 6 hrs ago

Article: Steve Jobs, Apple CEO and creative force, resigns
AP - 5 hrs ago


SAN FRANCISCO (AP) — Steve Jobs started Apple Computer with a high school friend in a Silicon Valley garage in 1976, was forced out a decade later, then returned to rescue the company. During his second stint, Apple grew into the most valuable technology company in the world.

Jobs invented and masterfully marketed ever-sleeker gadgets that transformed everyday technology, from the personal computer to the iPod and iPhone. Cultivating Apple's countercultural sensibility and a minimalist design ethic, he rolled out one sensational product after another, even in the face of the late-2000s recession and his own failing health.

Jobs helped change computers from a geeky hobbyist's obsession to a necessity of modern life at work and home, and in the process he upended not just personal technology but the cellphone and music industries.

Perhaps most influentially, he launched the iPod in 2001, which offered "1,000 songs in your pocket." Over the next 10 years, its white earphones and thumb-dial control seemed to become as ubiquitous as the wristwatch.

In 2007 came the touch-screen iPhone, and later its miniature "apps," which made the phone a device not just for making calls but for managing money, storing photos, playing games and browsing the Web.

And in 2010, Jobs introduced the iPad, a tablet-sized, all-touch computer that took off even though market analysts said no one really needed one.
Earlier this month, Apple briefly surpassed Exxon Mobil as the most valuable company in America, with Apple stock on the open market worth more than other company's.

Under Jobs, the company cloaked itself in secrecy to build frenzied anticipation for each of its new products. Jobs himself had a wizardly sense of what his customers wanted, and where demand didn't exist, he leveraged a cult-like following to create it.

When he spoke at Apple presentations, almost always in faded blue jeans, sneakers and a black mock turtleneck, legions of Apple acolytes listened to every word. He often boasted about Apple successes, then coyly added a coda — "One more thing" — before introducing its latest ambitious idea.

In recent years, Apple investors also watched these appearances for clues to his health.

In 2004, Jobs revealed that he had been diagnosed with — and "cured" of — a rare form of operable pancreatic cancer called an islet cell neuroendocrine tumor. In early 2009, it became clear he was again ill.

Jobs took a half-year medical leave of absence starting in January 2009, during which he had a liver transplant. Last January, he announced another medical leave, his third, with no set duration. He returned to the spotlight briefly in March to personally unveil a second-generation iPad.

Jobs grew up in California and after finishing high school enrolled in Reed College in Portland, Ore., but dropped out after a semester.

"All of my working-class parents' savings were being spent on my college tuition. After six months, I couldn't see the value in it," he said at a Stanford University commencement address in 2005. "I had no idea what I wanted to do with my life and no idea how college was going to help me figure it out."

When he returned to California in 1974, Jobs worked for video game maker Atari and attended meetings of a local computer club with Steve Wozniak, a high school friend who was a few years older.

Wozniak's homemade computer drew attention from other enthusiasts, but Jobs saw its potential far beyond the geeky hobbyists of the time. The pair started Apple in Jobs' parents' garage two years later. Their first creation was the Apple I — essentially, the guts of a computer without a case, keyboard or monitor.

The Apple II, which hit the market in 1977, was their first machine for the masses. It became so popular that Jobs was worth $100 million by age 25. Time magazine put him on its cover for the first time in 1982.

Three years earlier, during a visit to the Xerox Palo Alto Research Center, Jobs again spotted mass potential in a niche invention: a computer that allowed people to access files and control programs with the click of a mouse, not typed commands. He returned to Apple and ordered the team to copy what he had seen.
It foreshadowed a propensity to take other people's concepts, improve on them and spin them into wildly successful products. Under Jobs, Apple didn't invent computers, digital music players or smartphones — it reinvented them for people who didn't want to learn computer programming or negotiate the technical hassles of keeping their gadgets working.

"We have always been shameless about stealing great ideas," Jobs said in an interview for the PBS series "Triumph of the Nerds."

The engineers responded with two computers. The pricier one, called Lisa, launched to a cool reception in 1983. A less-expensive model called the Macintosh exploded onto the scene in 1984.

The Mac was heralded by an epic Super Bowl commercial that referenced George Orwell's "1984" and captured Apple's iconoclastic style. In the ad, expressionless drones marched through dark halls to an auditorium where a Big Brother-like figure lectures on a big screen. A woman in a bright track uniform burst into the hall and launched a hammer into the screen, which exploded, stunning the drones, as a narrator announced the arrival of the Mac.

There were early stumbles at Apple. Jobs clashed with colleagues and even the CEO he had hired away from Pepsi, John Sculley. And after an initial spike, Mac sales slowed, in part because few programs had been written for the new graphical user interface.

Meanwhile, Microsoft copied the Mac approach and introduced Windows, outmaneuvering Apple by licensing its software to slews of computer makers.
With Apple's stock price sinking, conflicts between Jobs and Sculley mounted. Sculley won over the board in 1985 and pushed Jobs out of his day-to-day role leading the Macintosh team. Jobs resigned his post as chairman of the board and left Apple within months.

"What had been the focus of my entire adult life was gone, and it was devastating," Jobs said in his Stanford speech. "I didn't see it then, but it turned out that getting fired from Apple was the best thing that could have ever happened to me. The heaviness of being successful was replaced by the lightness of being a beginner again, less sure about everything. It freed me to enter one of the most creative periods of my life."

He got into two other companies: Next, a computer maker, and Pixar, a computer-animation studio that he bought from George Lucas for $10 million.
Pixar, ultimately the more successful venture, seemed at first a bottomless money pit. Then came "Toy Story," the first computer-animated full-length feature. Jobs used its success to negotiate a sweeter deal with Disney for Pixar's next two films. In 2006, Jobs sold Pixar to The Walt Disney Co. for $7.4 billion in stock, making him Disney's largest individual shareholder and securing a seat on the board.
With Next, Jobs was said to be obsessive about the tiniest details of the cube-shaped computer, insisting on design perfection even for the machine's guts. He never managed to spark much demand for the machine, which cost a pricey $6,500 to $10,000.

Ultimately, he shifted the focus to software — a move that paid off later when Apple bought Next for its operating system technology, the basis for the software still used in Mac computers.

By 1996, when Apple bought Next, Apple was in dire financial straits. It had lost more than $800 million in a year, dragged its heels in licensing Mac software for other computers and surrendered most of its market share to PCs that ran Windows.

Larry Ellison, Jobs' close friend and fellow Silicon Valley billionaire and the leader of Oracle Corp., publicly contemplated buying Apple in early 1997 and ousting its leadership. The idea fizzled, but Jobs stepped in as interim chief later that year.
He slashed unprofitable projects, narrowed the company's focus and presided over a new marketing push to set the Mac apart from Windows, starting with a campaign encouraging computer users to "Think different."

Apple's first new product under his direction, the brightly colored, plastic iMac, launched in 1998 and sold about 2 million in its first year.

Jobs later dropped the "interim" from his title. He changed his style, too, said Tim Bajarin, who met Jobs several times while covering the company for Creative Strategies.

"In the early days, he was in charge of every detail. The only way you could say it is, he was kind of a control freak," he said. In his second stint, "he clearly was much more mellow and more mature."

In the decade that followed, Jobs returned Apple to profitability while pushing out an impressive roster of new products.

Apple's popularity exploded in the 2000s. The iPod, smaller and sleeker with each generation, introduced many lifelong Windows users to their first Apple gadget.
ITunes gave people a convenient way to buy music legally online, song by song. For the music industry, it was a mixed blessing. The industry got a way to reach Internet-savvy people who, in the age of Napster, were growing accustomed to downloading music free. But online sales also hastened the demise of CDs and established Apple as a gatekeeper, resulting in battles between Jobs and music executives over pricing and other issues.

Jobs' command over gadget lovers and pop culture swelled to the point that, on the eve of the iPhone's launch in 2007, faithful followers slept on sidewalks outside posh Apple stores for the chance to buy one. Three years later, at the iPad's debut, the lines snaked around blocks and out through parking lots, even though people had the option to order one in advance.

Jobs' personal ethos — he is a natural food lover who embraced Buddhism and New Age philosophy — was closely linked to the public persona he shaped for Apple.

Apple itself became a statement against the commoditization of technology — a cynical view, to be sure, from a company whose computers can cost three or more times as much as those of its rivals.
 

lkwdblds

Crusader
Re: The old days - Aboard the Apollo - 1973

Kudos to Carmelo for posting both the fine article on the economy and the story about Steve Jobs.

Both stories are pertininent to today's world and are chocked full of vital data!!

Steve Jobs is really an incredible person. What a visionary he is!! Watching videos of him, one quickly sees him as a genius, one who is able to detect needs in society better than anyone else and he possesses an uncanny ability to fill those needs in abundance with products that are so advanced that people either didn't anticipate them at all or thought they might arrive some time maybe 25 to 50 years from now. Jobs brings them to market at an affordable price and they do more things than what people ever suspected was possible. He is the ultimate innovator!
Lakey
 

lkwdblds

Crusader
Re: The old days - Aboard the Apollo - 1973

I wrote a post just previously on my other thread having to do with LARGE OUTPOINTS.

I think I hit on a good topic and wanted to post it here on the Apollo '73 thread as well. I know its double posting but the readership here is so much broader that I want the readers of this thread to check it out. Here is the article:

Virtually every family member of mine (except my brother), felt very negative about Scientology as did nearly every friend and every associate at work. Then all the press was also negative. Eventually, I became discouraged and felt that Scientology really did not have any chance to "clear the planet". However, at the time I felt this was a bad thing.

At the time, 1976 or 1977, I tried to think why this was so and I came up with two thoughts:
#1 Hubbard was going out of his way too much to pick fights with Psychiatry.
#2 Staffs were being treated too harshly and were not "winning".

I decided to write these up to Hubbard on the S.O. line.

The first letter I wrote was about psychiatry. I stated that I agreed that there was too much emphasis on drugs but I asserted that not all psychiatrists were evil, the way he was saying they were.

I said many good young people wanted to help society. The only way they knew to help mankind mentally was to study psychology in college and then go on and do graduate work at which point some of the really committed ones would receive medical training and become psychiatrists. I stated that most of these people were not suppressive but just wanted to help.

I received a reply from Hubbard (probably written by one of his ghost writers) which replied curtly, "We are in a war against psychiatry at this time and can't afford to be reasonable, the way you are suggesting. They are the enemy and have to be dealt with firmly." I am paraphrasing here.

When that came back, I sent LRH a second letter on the S. O line which had to do with wasting staff members. I wrote that too many good people were being kicked off of staff and/or kicked out of the Sea Org. I cited myself as one of them. I said that much effort is expended to recruit and some very fine people are successfully recruited. I asserted that these people need to be treasured and enhanced and conditions had to be made more pleasing so that they would permanently remain.

I mentioned that I was going to write a program to change the way staff are treated so that the good ones would want to stay. Hubbard's ghost writer wrote a short reply and told me to forward my program on staff up to him through such and such a channel and that he would like to see it. I never followed through with doing the program.

THE TITLE OF MY PROGRAM WOULD HAVE BEEN - "THE LEFT HAND (The Recruiters) DID NOT KNOW WHAT THE RIGHT HAND (The Execs) WAS DOING."

This would have been similar to what Miscavige came up with for the "Why" leading to the Golden Age of Tech, "THE BLIND LEADING THE BLIND". It is really just a non optimum state of affairs. The string has to be pulled further on this non optimum state of affairs to get to a valid "WHY".

The same thing with my non optimum state of affairs, "THE LEFT HAND DID NOT KNOW WHAT THE RIGHT HAND WAS DOING". One would have to explore why this was the case to find a valid "Why".

If the string was pulled on this anaomaly, the answer might reveal some errors in Hubbard's system of statistics. The recruiters stat was to enlist recruits and after that he was done. Once the new recruit was on his own, he was unhatted and just a sitting duck for senior staff to misuse, abuse and dump on.

THERE WAS NO STAT TO ENHANCE AND TRAIN STAFF MEMBERS SO THAT THEY WERE STABLE AND PROPERLY POSTED! This seems to be a breakdown and failure in Hubbard's OEC and FEBC System! Thats what I should have written up to Hubbard in 1977! Who knows, if I would have been able to figure it out then. I seriously doubt it. Who kinows, maybe he would have claimed it as his own thought and put it into use.


Lakey
 
Last edited:
Re: The old days - Aboard the Apollo - 1973

I wrote a post just previously on my other thread having to do with LARGE OUTPOINTS.

I think I hit on a good topic and wanted to post it here on the Apollo '73 thread as well. I know its double posting but the readership here is so much broader that I want the readers of this thread to check it out. Here is the article:

Virtually every family member of mine (except my brother), felt very negative about Scientology as did nearly every friend and every associate at work. Then all the press was also negative. Eventually, I became discouraged and felt that Scientology really did not have any chance to "clear the planet". However, at the time I felt this was a bad thing.

At the time, 1976 or 1977, I tried to think why this was so and I came up with two thoughts:
#1 Hubbard was going out of his way too much to pick fights with Psychiatry.
#2 Staffs were being treated too harshly and were not "winning".

I decided to write these up to Hubbard on the S.O. line.

The first letter I wrote was about psychiatry. I stated that I agreed that there was too much emphasis on drugs but I asserted that not all psychiatrists were evil, the way he was saying they were.

I said many good young people wanted to help society. The only way they knew to help mankind mentally was to study psychology in college and then go on and do graduate work at which point some of the really committed ones would receive medical training and become psychiatrists. I stated that most of these people were not suppressive but just wanted to help.

I received a reply from Hubbard (probably written by one of his ghost writers) which replied curtly, "We are in a war against psychiatry at this time and can't afford to be reasonable, the way you are suggesting. They are the enemy and have to be dealt with firmly." I am paraphrasing here.

When that came back, I sent LRH a second letter on the S. O line which had to do with wasting staff members. I wrote that too many good people were being kicked off of staff and/or kicked out of the Sea Org. I cited myself as one of them. I said that much effort is expended to recruit and some very fine people are successfully recruited. I asserted that these people need to be treasured and enhanced and conditions had to be made more pleasing so that they would permanently remain.

I mentioned that I was going to write a program to change the way staff are treated so that the good ones would want to stay. Hubbard's ghost writer wrote a short reply and told me to forward my program on staff up to him through such and such a channel and that he would like to see it. I never followed through with doing the program.

THE TITLE OF MY PROGRAM WOULD HAVE BEEN - "THE LEFT HAND (The Recruiters) DID NOT KNOW WHAT THE RIGHT HAND (The Execs) WAS DOING."

This would have been similar to what Miscavige came up with for the "Why" leading to the Golden Age of Tech, "THE BLIND LEADING THE BLIND". It is really just a non optimum state of affairs. The string has to be pulled further on this non optimum state of affairs to get to a valid "WHY".

The same thing with my non optimum state of affairs, "THE LEFT HAND DID NOT KNOW WHAT THE RIGHT HAND WAS DOING". One would have to explore why this was the case to find a valif "Why".

If the string was pulled on this anaomalie, the answer might reveal some errors in Hubbard's system of statistics. The recruiters stat was to enlist recruits and after that he was done. Once the new recruit was on his own, he was unhatted and just a sitting duck for senior staff to misuse and dump on.

THERE WAS NO STAT TO ENHANCE AND TRAIN STAFF MEMBERS SO THAT THEY WERE STABLE AND PROPERLY POSTED! This seems to be a breakdown and failure in Hubbard's OEC and FEBC System! Thats what I should have written up to Hubbard in 1977! Who knows, if I would have been able to figure it out then. I seriously doubt it. Who kinows, maybe he would have claimed it as his own thought and put it into use.


Lakey

momentum is a funny thing

by the mid 60s, Hubbard had been over the top in greed and evil any number of times in major ways, but he still put a lot of energy into growing the thing

by 1970, the veneer of "Mr. Good Guy" was seriously beginning to unravel from the day to day LRH

by the mid 70s he was an avaricious demon with a thin veneer. there were thousands of starry eyed young people from the baby boomer generation pushing the stats up

there never was a time that Hubbard would turn the ship around and be a well rounded leader. It wasn't a part of his makeup to be fair. He was only in it for himself. Everything else was part of the act. The act got him and Scientology a long way.

all the good people and good intentions could either be do it his way or take the highway. John McMaster and Jack Horner, Reg Sharpe, Alan Walter, the list only starts there
 

FoTi

Crusader
Re: The old days - Aboard the Apollo - 1973

I wrote a post just previously on my other thread having to do with LARGE OUTPOINTS.

I think I hit on a good topic and wanted to post it here on the Apollo '73 thread as well. I know its double posting but the readership here is so much broader that I want the readers of this thread to check it out. Here is the article:

Virtually every family member of mine (except my brother), felt very negative about Scientology as did nearly every friend and every associate at work. Then all the press was also negative. Eventually, I became discouraged and felt that Scientology really did not have any chance to "clear the planet". However, at the time I felt this was a bad thing.

At the time, 1976 or 1977, I tried to think why this was so and I came up with two thoughts:
#1 Hubbard was going out of his way too much to pick fights with Psychiatry.
#2 Staffs were being treated too harshly and were not "winning".

I decided to write these up to Hubbard on the S.O. line.

The first letter I wrote was about psychiatry. I stated that I agreed that there was too much emphasis on drugs but I asserted that not all psychiatrists were evil, the way he was saying they were.

I said many good young people wanted to help society. The only way they knew to help mankind mentally was to study psychology in college and then go on and do graduate work at which point some of the really committed ones would receive medical training and become psychiatrists. I stated that most of these people were not suppressive but just wanted to help.

I received a reply from Hubbard (probably written by one of his ghost writers) which replied curtly, "We are in a war against psychiatry at this time and can't afford to be reasonable, the way you are suggesting. They are the enemy and have to be dealt with firmly." I am paraphrasing here.

When that came back, I sent LRH a second letter on the S. O line which had to do with wasting staff members. I wrote that too many good people were being kicked off of staff and/or kicked out of the Sea Org. I cited myself as one of them. I said that much effort is expended to recruit and some very fine people are successfully recruited. I asserted that these people need to be treasured and enhanced and conditions had to be made more pleasing so that they would permanently remain.

I mentioned that I was going to write a program to change the way staff are treated so that the good ones would want to stay. Hubbard's ghost writer wrote a short reply and told me to forward my program on staff up to him through such and such a channel and that he would like to see it. I never followed through with doing the program.

THE TITLE OF MY PROGRAM WOULD HAVE BEEN - "THE LEFT HAND (The Recruiters) DID NOT KNOW WHAT THE RIGHT HAND (The Execs) WAS DOING."

This would have been similar to what Miscavige came up with for the "Why" leading to the Golden Age of Tech, "THE BLIND LEADING THE BLIND". It is really just a non optimum state of affairs. The string has to be pulled further on this non optimum state of affairs to get to a valid "WHY".

The same thing with my non optimum state of affairs, "THE LEFT HAND DID NOT KNOW WHAT THE RIGHT HAND WAS DOING". One would have to explore why this was the case to find a valid "Why".

If the string was pulled on this anaomaly, the answer might reveal some errors in Hubbard's system of statistics. The recruiters stat was to enlist recruits and after that he was done. Once the new recruit was on his own, he was unhatted and just a sitting duck for senior staff to misuse, abuse and dump on.

THERE WAS NO STAT TO ENHANCE AND TRAIN STAFF MEMBERS SO THAT THEY WERE STABLE AND PROPERLY POSTED! This seems to be a breakdown and failure in Hubbard's OEC and FEBC System! Thats what I should have written up to Hubbard in 1977! Who knows, if I would have been able to figure it out then. I seriously doubt it. Who kinows, maybe he would have claimed it as his own thought and put it into use.


Lakey

Lakey...you were trying to swim against the tide.

The undertow was too strong.

LRH was not about to change his ways no matter what you or anyone else did. Your good intentions toward the staff were not in line with the way LRH wanted things to be. He could have cared less about the well being of his staff.....he only had them there to serve him and carry out his wishes.....his intentions.....to benefit him only. They were his slaves and he had them mindf*@ked..... hornswaggled...subtley hypnotized....to be that way and act on his behalf....not on their own behalf.

Scientology was never intended to help individuals live a better life and achieve their own personal dreams.....that was just PR....Scientology was intended to help LRH achieve his dream....he needed all those people working together to help him achieve his affirmations. There were some gains to be made in the process, otherwise people would not have stayed on, but the main thing was to pressure, pressure, pressure.... push and shove and cajole and punish and demand obedience and bend people to the mindset of LRH....to fulfill his prophecies of himself, for himself. Anything that went against that he got rid of. He did anything he could get away with, to dominate others and line his pockets with $. He stepped on other people, walked on other people, cheated them and stole their lives to get where he wanted to go. He was covertly and sometimes not so covertly evil. He wasn't blind and he knew exactly what he was doing.....he just didn't want others to know what he was really up to.....it would have spoiled his game. Gotta keep 'em down and stupid.

He was a very clever SOB.....a real SP. He ruined a lot of lives and caused a lot of people a lot of pain....under the guize and PR that his intention was to make people's lives better. His farce made him a lot of $ and kept him from going to prison. He fooled a lot of people.....to their detriment and to his benefit.

He created a monster which is still alive today....25 years after his death, which is slowly dying, but is still a lot of trouble to a lot of people and is still doing damage, which it will continue to do until it is totally dead......because that's the way LRH set it up. It was his machine....his cash cow and his protection from the law. He could "Do what thou wilt".....commit whatever crimes he felt like and never have to pay the price or do the time for his evil deeds.....because he had his own army of followers that protected him and stood between him and the law.....an army of followers that were blind to what he was really about.....and didn't dare look. LRH said that evil was the hardest thing to confront. He knew that about people and that was his ace in the hole. That is what allowed him to get away with it.

Do you really think he would have changed the way the staff were treated just because you pointed out the out-points?

LRH had his own adjenda....you just didn't fit in....you were too kind, too logical, too much of a free thinker.

There was some tape he made which suggested that the orgs take better care of their staff because a staff member had died.....I don't know the name of the tape, but it was from the 50's. But did he follow that himself? NO :no:

There was no stat to train or enhance staff members and there was also no post and no stat in relation to a person's life getting better, be they staff or public. LRH did not intend for anyone's life to get better....he just wanted to enslave them..... to serve him better....to achieve his goals.

LRH's creation....the Co$.... is a glorified institution of voluntary slavery......a bundle of false purposes.
 

Ted

Gold Meritorious Patron
Re: The old days - Aboard the Apollo - 1973

Lakey...you were trying to swim against the tide.

The undertow was too strong.

LRH was not about to change his ways no matter what you or anyone else did. Your good intentions toward the staff were not in line with the way LRH wanted things to be. He could have cared less about the well being of his staff.....he only had them there to serve him and carry out his wishes.....his intentions.....to benefit him only. They were his slaves and he had them mindf*@ked..... hornswaggled...subtley hypnotized....to be that way and act on his behalf....not on their own behalf.

Scientology was never intended to help individuals live a better life and achieve their own personal dreams.....that was just PR....Scientology was intended to help LRH achieve his dream....he needed all those people working together to help him achieve his affirmations. There were some gains to be made in the process, otherwise people would not have stayed on, but the main thing was to pressure, pressure, pressure.... push and shove and cajole and punish and demand obedience and bend people to the mindset of LRH....to fulfill his prophecies of himself, for himself. Anything that went against that he got rid of. He did anything he could get away with, to dominate others and line his pockets with $. He stepped on other people, walked on other people, cheated them and stole their lives to get where he wanted to go. He was covertly and sometimes not so covertly evil. He wasn't blind and he knew exactly what he was doing.....he just didn't want others to know what he was really up to.....it would have spoiled his game. Gotta keep 'em down and stupid.

He was a very clever SOB.....a real SP. He ruined a lot of lives and caused a lot of people a lot of pain....under the guize and PR that his intention was to make people's lives better. His farce made him a lot of $ and kept him from going to prison. He fooled a lot of people.....to their detriment and to his benefit.

He created a monster which is still alive today....25 years after his death, which is slowly dying, but is still a lot of trouble to a lot of people and is still doing damage, which it will continue to do until it is totally dead......because that's the way LRH set it up. It was his machine....his cash cow and his protection from the law. He could "Do what thou wilt".....commit whatever crimes he felt like and never have to pay the price or do the time for his evil deeds.....because he had his own army of followers that protected him and stood between him and the law.....an army of followers that were blind to what he was really about.....and didn't dare look. LRH said that evil was the hardest thing to confront. He knew that about people and that was his ace in the hole. That is what allowed him to get away with it.

Do you really think he would have changed the way the staff were treated just because you pointed out the out-points?

LRH had his own adjenda....you just didn't fit in....you were too kind, too logical, too much of a free thinker.

There was some tape he made which suggested that the orgs take better care of their staff because a staff member had died.....I don't know the name of the tape, but it was from the 50's. But did he follow that himself? NO :no:

There was no stat to train or enhance staff members and there was also no post and no stat in relation to a person's life getting better, be they staff or public. LRH did not intend for anyone's life to get better....he just wanted to enslave them..... to serve him better....to achieve his goals.

LRH's creation....the Co$.... is a glorified institution of voluntary slavery......a bundle of false purposes.


FoTi, I am so happy you decided to unload. This is an excellent post! Right on target!

Ted
 

lkwdblds

Crusader
Re: The old days - Aboard the Apollo - 1973

FoTi, I am so happy you decided to unload. This is an excellent post! Right on target!

Ted

I second the motion. FoTi really told it like it is. No punches were pulled and her post is right on the money!!


On that fine by the City of Clearwater against C of S, I thought of a sick joke. How about C of S offering the City of Clearwater the status of Founder Meritorius Titanium Plated or whatever they call it where the recipient gets a cornerstone on the building acknowledging their contribution.

Lakey
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top